The rule is cut and dry...

And this is why I love this board...

Take a topic as sensical and straigt forward, as the "don't leave your bench during an altercation rule in the NBA", and you can still find opposition.

1. Opposition states, "we don't want cut and dry... we want interpretation..." That's laughable... can't believe you guys could even form your lips to state such!
2. Oppostion states, "we want the big 6'6+, 250lb +, type a personalities, to be able to get off the bench and see about their team mates because...?
A. They have medical degrees?
B. The 5 foot +, 120 lb referees, all two of them, will be able to control the situation, if by chance, and this would never occur, they might want to fight.
C. They don't fight well... we've seen them fight each other, the audience, and the refs, but they never really hit anyone.
3. Opposition says, "Other sports don't have this rule... look at baseball!" I refuse to look at baseball... just like the millions of other EX FANS!

Here's the point gentlemen... there was a rule... the rule was created to stop out of control men, from getting out of control... the rule has worked... the rule was recently broken... there are ramifications for breaking the rules... now everyone wants the rule revoked, because it was unfair...

Is it unfair to bench the starting QB who was caught at a party with alcohol, even though he wasn't drinking?
Is it fair for your stud LB to ineligible, because he couldn't keep his grades up at the end of basketball season... LAST YEAR?
Well then guys... it has to be fair, to hold a man accountable and responsible, for staying in his seat, when something happens on the court... that's not his job, and all he can do is add to the problem.

A player gets hurt on the field. All the kids gather around to "SEE"... first thing a coach does is tell the kids to go back to the huddle... these a type personalities have been taught their entire lives to go back to their bench, huddle, sideline... Shame on the Diou and Stoudameire!

Changed your mind about that fight... huh?



Youi make good points here coach... can't be denied...

The players were hustling 10-15 feet towards a play... for what?
1. "... to get in someone's face." Not a good thing... hence the rule.
2. "... going to their teammate." To do what? Administer first aid?
3. "...look at some girls cleavage." If you have to get that close to see it... its not worth seeing.
4. "...most of our laws have grey area." I know you are not trying to analogize our legal system to further your point.

I will conclude with the following... good or bad, everything has rules, if you don't like a rule, challenge it, get it changed... but don't wait until it happens to someone you like, before you challenge its relevance...

The rule was a great rule when it was first created... not one out cry... hadn't heard a peep about it, for the past 5 years...

Now... all of a sudden, its unfair, and too cut and dry... because the Suns might lose a series because of it...

I like the rule... it leaves no room for interpretation... its cut and dry... it stops fights from escalating to brawls and riots... just shocked, my coaching brethern does not feel the same way.

And that's fine!

It goes without saying... Everyone is entitled to their own opinion...

Even if its wrong!

Nah, just funny how some people have opinions, like we all do, but their's are right, and the rest of us are wrong.

I guess my point in the post you quoted was that what happened to their teammate was {censored}. I don't think getting in his face would be a good thing. Agreed, but not "hence the rule." No, they weren't going to administer first aid. They are teammates, and I'm going to assume they care about each other and what happens to one another. I know if you have played football on a good TEAM (and I don't mean necessarily one that won a bunch of games), then you know teammates are more than just guys you play ball with. Clevage...well, I probably shouldn't have gone there.

As far as our legal system goes, Stern is the commissioner of his league and is the judge and jury much like Goodell in the NFL. Our laws are built with grey areas. Zero tolerance has it's place, but sometimes their are circumstances that must be taken into account. I'm sure there are head coaches on here who could give us numerous examples of times where they had to punish players for something they had done and the punishment is not always the same, even though they broke the same rule. As a coach, I promise to treat everyone fairly, but not equally. If my player is late to practice, gets frustrated because he's punished, and then looses his temper in frustration...do I throw his a** off the field? Maybe he's a jerk? Spoiled brat? Dumb kid who has no respect? Maybe he was late because he had to pick his dad up from jail and got into a fist fight with him at school infront of some of his friends. (Not the greatest analogy I know, but it's what came to me. Experience I had a few years ago coaching.)

I guess my general thought is there are grey areas in our legal system, our homes, our businesses, our schools, and on our football teams. Rules are rules, yes of course and zero tolerance has it's place. But, while we are rambling on and on about the NBA on this football site, let's remember that stepping onto the court when there is an altercation will get you suspended. Black and white, you do it and you're gone. Does that really seem fair? What if...?

Well...you know what they say about you over at Turk's...

You are the Master Baiter!

*ding* *ding* *ding*

Sorry, I have absolutely nothing to add, in this brief intermission. It just seems like a good place to post my 100th response and see if I get that Senior Member title. Senior member, and I still don't know my ass from my elbow. Nice.

Okay sorry, back to the action...

*ding* *ding* *ding*

Hill - Larry - Us!